EMPEROR Vs. YELLAPPA DURGAJI JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two applications have been heard together, and raise substantially the same points. Both applicants have been committed by the Special Magistrate, First Class, Belgaum, to take their trial before the Sessions Court, Belgaum, the first applicant on charges under Secs.120-B, 161 or 213 of the Indian Penal Code, and the second applicant under Secs.120-B, 161 or 213 and 114 and 219 of the Indian Penal Code. The applications are made under the provisions of Section 215 of the Criminal P. C. to have the committal quashed on the ground of certain illegalities that are alleged. The grounds relied upon seem mainly to be the following; (1) that there is a misjoinder of the accused persons, as well aa a misjoinder of charges; (2) that in the alternative if it is held that there is no misjoinder of the accused, or of charges, the joint trial of the applicants, along with their co-accused in the committal order would seriously prejudice their trial and lead to a miscarriage of justice; (3) that one of the charges against the first applicant being under Section 213 of the Indian Penal Code, the same is not maintainable in law as it has not been found that there was an offender whom the applicant attempted to screen; and (4) that the learned Magistrate wrongly disallowed a certain prosecution witness being summoned and examined and certain documents produced on behalf of the first applicant and certain witnesses summoned and examined on behalf of the second applicant.

(2.) under Section 215, Criminal Procedure Code, we would not ordinarily interfere with an order of committal unless we were satisfied from the record that there was an illegality in the order. The test, in my opinion, in a matter of this nature is to see from the judgment of the learned Magistrate what his findings on the evidence are and whether those findings are capable prima facie of sustaining the charges he has framed and on which the committal to the Court of Session is made.

(3.) Mr. Murdeshwar on behalf of the first applicant has not been able to point to any part of the judgment of the learned Magistrate which would show that there is any illegality in his order of committal on the charges he has framed. With regard to the question of the wording of the charges and whether there is a misjoinder of the accused, it will be open to the applicants to urge their contentions before the Sessions Court, We have no desire to interfere in a matter, which the Sessions Court would be competent to determine.